We all know the game is rigged, yet people still stroll up to that feeding bottle in the corner of the rat cage every four years to get their dose of
"freedom juice", knowing all the while that the $h!t they're drinking is a placebo.

You love Paul? Who wouldn't? He does have some good ideas.
However; at the end of the day, do you think he's going to have any more power than any of the past couple of clowns that have occupied that office?
The POTUS is at the mercy of Congress, and Congress is at the mercy of their investors (Banks, Big Oil, and various other mega-corps). The system, as
I said before, is the problem. The system you're trying to maintain for the sake of your "standard of living."

I agree. People should revolt. But there are too many limp wristed liberals for that to happen.

I think Paul is the only semi realistic hope for improvment in the near future so I support him.

As a libertarian socialist/anarchist I am with you. I dont really think Paul can win but Imhoping that when he doesnt his supporters become more
radical.

You are a libertarian socialist/anarchist that hates liberals in the name of Ron Paul so that they will view themselves as being opposed to Ron
Paul...and you want people to think that Ron Paul supporters are radical revolutionaries?

Everything you are saying seems designed to turn people away from him, at a time when he needs the left to embrace him as the right has decided to
push him out.

Originally posted by hadriana
I would rather die from 'hippy do-gooders' than Uptight, control freak Monsanto worshipers.
What some people see as 'moving forward' makes me wonder what goal they are looking at.

Destroying the world? Total dehumanization? What?

I think environmentalists are like luddites. Like machine breakers.

Moving forward is being able to keep your house warm or cool without it costing a fortune for a start.

Luddites are ones that scorn progress
such as investing and researching new power sources (omg, green energy).
I see environmentalists and technological progressionists walk hand in hand. progress is not returning to the dawning of the industrial age with
cities choking with carbon smog and 10 miles to the gallon automobiles.

You, sir, are a prime example of a luddite.
I fancy myself a transhumanist personally (its a mindset..google it). I see technology becoming more and more powerful, and tempered with
environmental concerns. You seem to favor politics of big oil and a stamping out of innovation towards new power sources.

Point is, I see the conservative, and especially the Ron Paul type mindset, to be the exact opposite towards really big leaps in technological
progression
The internet wasn't invented by some guy in a basement, it was a massive project by the federal government. Space exploration is only done by
governments, etc..

Bah, nevermind..go eat some freedom fries and forget you made this thread.

Originally posted by theubermensch
What do you think about Pauls stance on gays for example since you know so much?

His views on amending the constitution to define marriage between a man and a woman?
He opposes it...if they want to get married, let em get married..he personally opposes it, but he (rightfully) believes that its not up to the fed to
decide what this religious ceremony can allow. Let the states decide.

I don't dislike many of Pauls stands...some I am very much favoring..some are interesting, and some are disastrous as I said..but its all a moot
point considering he won't be in the election.

I think the disastous are not that at all. Like how you dont agree with his foriegn policy. What dont you agree with? He wants to stop policing the
world and wasting money on war. Sounds good to me. I am against American Imperialism. I also likethat he will try to stop the IMF from propping up
failing capitalist government to the detriment of their people.

And I didnt really mean the gay marraige thing. But I meant that his stance on taxpayers paying for en vougue leftist causes like AIDS patients is
used to say he is anti-gay. His stance does not reflect that at all,he is saying that as a libertarian he is against the taxpayer forking out for
illness that is contracted through lifestyle choices. He is libertarian not anti-gay.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
Troll much?? Everything you are saying seems designed to turn people away from him, at a time when he needs the left to embrace him as the right has
decided to push him out.

edit on 31-1-2012 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

Oh wow, if he's doing this for that purpose we must crown this man king when Ron Paul fails.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
Troll much?? Everything you are saying seems designed to turn people away from him, at a time when he needs the left to embrace him as the right has
decided to push him out.

edit on 31-1-2012 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

Oh wow, if he's doing this for that purpose we must crown this man king when Ron Paul fails.

Maybe you guys just take things too seriously and have no sense of humour.

Originally posted by The_Phantom
Troll much?? Everything you are saying seems designed to turn people away from him, at a time when he needs the left to embrace him as the right has
decided to push him out.

edit on 31-1-2012 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

Oh wow, if he's doing this for that purpose we must crown this man king when Ron Paul fails.

Maybe you guys just take things too seriously and have no sense of humour.

We all know the game is rigged, yet people still stroll up to that feeding bottle in the corner of the rat cage every four years to get their dose of
"freedom juice", knowing all the while that the $h!t they're drinking is a placebo.

You love Paul? Who wouldn't? He does have some good ideas.
However; at the end of the day, do you think he's going to have any more power than any of the past couple of clowns that have occupied that office?
The POTUS is at the mercy of Congress, and Congress is at the mercy of their investors (Banks, Big Oil, and various other mega-corps). The system, as
I said before, is the problem. The system you're trying to maintain for the sake of your "standard of living."

I agree. People should revolt. But there are too many limp wristed liberals for that to happen.

I think Paul is the only semi realistic hope for improvment in the near future so I support him.

As a libertarian socialist/anarchist I am with you. I dont really think Paul can win but Imhoping that when he doesnt his supporters become more
radical.

You are a libertarian socialist/anarchist that hates liberals in the name of Ron Paul so that they will view themselves as being opposed to Ron
Paul...and you want people to think that Ron Paul supporters are radical revolutionaries?

Everything you are saying seems designed to turn people away from him, at a time when he needs the left to embrace him as the right has decided to
push him out.

Originally posted by theubermensch
What do you think about Pauls stance on gays for example since you know so much?

His views on amending the constitution to define marriage between a man and a woman?
He opposes it...if they want to get married, let em get married..he personally opposes it, but he (rightfully) believes that its not up to the fed to
decide what this religious ceremony can allow. Let the states decide.

I don't dislike many of Pauls stands...some I am very much favoring..some are interesting, and some are disastrous as I said..but its all a moot
point considering he won't be in the election.

I think the disastous are not that at all. Like how you dont agree with his foriegn policy. What dont you agree with? He wants to stop policing the
world and wasting money on war. Sounds good to me.

I really don't like debating with someone whom clearly has a reading disability through text
I said this:

Ya, I know him..like his foreign policys, like some of his domestic policys, and some are epic fail disasters.

I -like- his foreign policies. like means that I agree with..favor...am all for.

I am against American Imperialism. I also likethat he will try to stop the IMF from propping up failing capitalist government to the detriment of
their people.

That is a complex subject that requires specialists to discuss. I do not pretend to know much about nuclear physics (some, not a lot..), and I know
even less about our monitary system and its seemingly fiat economy..I mean, I understand the basic concepts, and how it is entangled into the global
economy. I however am not silly enough to think all we have to do is kick the legs from it and everything will be perfect. like saying if a person
has a brain tumor, all we have to do is reach in and grab the tumor with some salad tongs and voila, everything fixed.

Unless you can show me some higher education degrees in finance, then you are in the same boat I am..both listening to some politician suggesting
which salad tong to use to rip out what he deems is an issue.

I am ultimately neutral on that based on not enough education.

And I didnt really mean the gay marraige thing. But I meant that his stance on taxpayers paying for en vougue leftist causes like AIDS patients is
used to say he is anti-gay. His stance does not reflect that at all,he is saying that as a libertarian he is against the taxpayer forking out for
illness that is contracted through lifestyle choices. He is libertarian not anti-gay.

AIDS is a leftist cause? huh?
He is anti-gay...personally. His policys however are not..and I don't care what sort of views he has on gays. Its small minded, but he is a old man
from a different time when such things were black and white. I don't fault him, nor my granny, for their old school racist viewpoints. meh..they were
programmed different.

But as far as lifestyle choices. lifestyle choices meaning what? Would he be supportive of it if its a hemophiliac? if it was through straight sex?
What about heart attacks? those are caused by cheeseburgers and smoking..
What about skin cancer..that lifestyle of suntanning is a choice
What about..etc. Basically, every single issue we have is from some lifestyle choice, be it failing eyesight because of too much reading, Aids through
t3d sex, high cholestrol from pizza love, etc.

If he is targetting just AIDS, then guess what...that is very much an anti-gay stance. All or nothing.

I don't think so. I think the evil rich bastards taking advantage of hippie do gooders has destroyed the world. No sense in hating on hippies, they
tried, and they generally know more than the average population who the real problem is. I actually know a lot of rainbow children (real hardcore
hippies) that are RP supporters to the end.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
I don't think so. I think the evil rich bastards taking advantage of hippie do gooders has destroyed the world. No sense in hating on hippies, they
tried, and they generally know more than the average population who the real problem is. I actually know a lot of rainbow children (real hardcore
hippies) that are RP supporters to the end.

Im sure ther are many hippies that support him. And gay people. They should.

I will give you that most hippie music today sucks (..phish bleh), and there are pseudo hippies that suck. Those I think are more into hippie chic
though. Actual hippies usually don't both anyone, actually they try to stay off the grid as much as possible. A lot of the green initiatives are put
forth not by hippies, but by idiot liberals (i for the most part AM a liberal, I still know then when I see them) that get concerned about an idea and
then let the government swoop in with an answer that has an obvious ulterior motive.

TextIf he is targetting just AIDS, then guess what...that is very much an anti-gay stance. All or nothing.

It isnt. If leftists were into junkee rights then he would be accused of being ant-junkee.

He is libertarian not anti-gay.

If you target a group because you disapprove of their lifestyle, then you are against, or anti, that group.

You are suggesting aids is a disease based off a lifestyle choice (being gay). that makes him anti-gay by the very definition.
Junkies...what types? alcoholics? mary smokers? (he is pro-legalization btw..why many of the kids like him),

Actually, I am stepping out of this thread. its becoming too surreal and scattered to even try to follow. Your a Ron Paul fan...congrats. incidently,
Ron Paul is super uber democrat in regards to his foreign policy ideals...and some of his domestic ideas are also liberal (such as legalize it, let
women go into "massage' businesses, etc)...so, arguably he is far more democratic than republican if you demand shoving him into a two party system.
Your bigger threat to him is Romney/Gingrich types moreso than Obama. If Paul ran, he could very much challenge Obama...but he is running as a
republican..therefore your true enemy is the GOP by 1000%

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.